Today brings us two more shots in the fight for Seattle Municipal Court: More claims of alleged illegal spending—and another of improper misconduct by a judge. Fun stuff.

For quick context: There was a formal complaint filed in September with the state that claims a PAC of DUI lawyers, Citizens for Judicial Excellence, illegally coordinated with the judicial campaign for Ed McKenna. That complaint was filed by James Tupper, a supporter of McKenna's opponent, presiding judge Edsonya Charles. Yesterday, McKenna's former campaign manager released nearly a dozen documents that are being added to the complaint that appear to show CJE's consultant working intimately with McKenna (but McKenna never reported the consultant's work).

Today brings the release of another email exchange between that consultant, Mary Ann Ottinger, which apparently say she is supposed to receive regular updates from the campaign (.pdf). As for financial records, Ottinger writes, "I cannot be privy to that information because I am in a decision making capacity with a pac. You can redact that information."

Greg Hirakawa, a criminal defense attorney who supports Charles, says of the records, "Here I think you have evidence of coordinating activity between CJE and the McKenna campaign. Consulting services are a contribution.... Independent expenditures have to be disclosed and you have to follow contribution limits. And you cant get much clearer that that."

But CJE spoksewoman Patricia Fulton responds in a statement, “We have worked very hard to fully comply with all [Washington State Public Disclosure Commission (PDC)] regulations and have sought advisement throughout from the PDC before taking any actions. There is NO prohibition from a PAC talking to, encouraging, or even meeting with a candidate. The PDC regulations prohibit the 'coordination of expenditures' which we have in no way done.”

And that's not all.

McKenna has filed his own complaint (.pdf) against the Charles campaign—alleging that she may have violated the judiacial code of conduct by making reckless statements. Charles and her supporters have repeatedly claimed that the support of a DUI attorneys raised ethical questions and, in one instance said, CJE's support “threatens the integrity of our entire justice system." Filed with the Fair Campaign Practices Committee of the Fair Campaign Practices Committee King County Bar Association, McKenna writes that quotes from Charles and Tupper—more than just violating judicial codes of conduct—could run afoul of a state supreme court ruling:

The facts and statements contained [in the complaint] are remarkably similar to those stated before the Washington State Supreme Court in the case of In re Kaiser, in which Judge Kaiser was censured for suggesting improper motives of attorneys contributing to the campaign of his opponent as well as making statements regarding being tough on a particular class of defendant. As in Kaiser, Judge Charles, through her campaign has “[S]uggested that there is something improper about attorneys contributing to a judicial campaign, when, of course, such contributions are entirely proper.” Kaiser at 282.

McKenna concludes, "The statements quoted herein are so inflammatory in nature that they undermine public confidence in the judicial system and reflect adversely on the profession as a whole."